Additional Resource Volume-Will they drill Antelope-7?

[petrengr1]

I take it that none of us here are geophysicists so let’s see if we can learn anything from what IOC has presented at http://tinyurl.com/palye9e . First let’s look at the picture of the faults on the right side of Chart 13. You see three hypothetical faults at different angles. Now we need to decide which of these faults most closely represent the actual fault angle. In the middle picture they show the new gravity survey which they say supports the updated fault possibilities. The blue line in the middle and right picture represents the fault position for the old mid-case (P-50) that was probably used by both GLJ and GCA. The black line is what they now consider to be the new mid-case and it is as much as 2.5 km further west than the old mid-case. This would put the edge of the field almost to the western edge of PRL15. This line is also the same as the western most fault shown in the left picture of Chart 13. The red line is the high-case and you can see on the right hand picture that this case would extend the gas bearing rock all the way to below the gas/water contact to the West. (This is also illustrated in the left picture of Chart 14.) The red line is as much as 6 km west of the old mid-case line and would be well outside of the western boundary of PRL15. That is probably the reason it is not shown in the left picture of Chart 13.

That is the gravity data. What about the seismic data? Let’s look at Chart 23. Hession said this picture on the right side of Chart 23 shows that the field extends further to the west and that we can begin to pick the placement of the faults. As amateur geophysicists let’s assume the red, blue and yellow lines represent the gas bearing limestone. You can see that Antelope has been separated from Mule Deer and Mule Deer has been separated from White Tail by these faults. Antelope has been pushed up over Mule Deer and Mule Deer has been pushed up over White Tail. So go ahead and draw in your faults at the angle you think the picture indicates. Is it the steep angle (blue) shown in Chart 13, the mid-case (black) or the shallow angle (red) of the high case? Now, let’s look at Chart 26. Oh good, the professionals have drawn in the faults for us. Looking at the fault between Antelope and Mule Deer what does that look like to you? The steep fault of the low case or the shallow angle of the high case?

On Page 9 of the recent report from Morgan Stanley Hession says that both the newly reprocessed seismic and the new gravity data “definitely give us more volume”.

[Thylacine-2]

I take it that none of us here are geophysicists so let’s see if we can learn anything from what IOC has presented at http://tinyurl.com/palye9e . First let’s look at the picture of the faults on the right side of Chart 13. You see three hypothetical faults at different angles. Now we need to decide which of these faults most closely represent the actual fault angle. In the middle picture they show the new gravity survey which they say supports the updated fault possibilities. The blue line in the middle and right picture represents the fault position for the old mid-case (P-50) that was probably used by both GLJ and GCA. The black line is what they now consider to be the new mid-case and it is as much as 2.5 km further west than the old mid-case. This would put the edge of the field almost to the western edge of PRL15. This line is also the same as the western most fault shown in the left picture of Chart 13. The red line is the high-case and you can see on the right hand picture that this case would extend the gas bearing rock all the way to below the gas/water contact to the West. (This is also illustrated in the left picture of Chart 14.) The red line is as much as 6 km west of the old mid-case line and would be well outside of the western boundary of PRL15. That is probably the reason it is not shown in the left picture of Chart 13.

That is the gravity data. What about the seismic data? Let’s look at Chart 23. Hession said this picture on the right side of Chart 23 shows that the field extends further to the west and that we can begin to pick the placement of the faults. As amateur geophysicists let’s assume the red, blue and yellow lines represent the gas bearing limestone. You can see that Antelope has been separated from Mule Deer and Mule Deer has been separated from White Tail by these faults. Antelope has been pushed up over Mule Deer and Mule Deer has been pushed up over White Tail. So go ahead and draw in your faults at the angle you think the picture indicates. Is it the steep angle (blue) shown in Chart 13, the mid-case (black) or the shallow angle (red) of the high case? Now, let’s look at Chart 26. Oh good, the professionals have drawn in the faults for us. Looking at the fault between Antelope and Mule Deer what does that look like to you? The steep fault of the low case or the shallow angle of the high case?

On Page 9 of the recent report from Morgan Stanley Hession says that both the newly reprocessed seismic and the new gravity data “definitely give us more volume”.

Thanks, Pet!  If the gravity gradiometry is as good an indication of reefal buildup on the west side of Antelope as it appears to indicate the reefal buildup in the areas where wells have been drilled so far, would you agree it looks like there may be room for another 4 to 5 wells on the west half of Antelope?

[jft310]

To my untrained eye it appears to be the shallow angle of the high case . Am I right ?? Think that's gets us close to the previous high estimates of GLJ at 11.8 T's ?.as a mid case .

[Palm]

"I've never seen anything like it."

[Tusker]

Page 26. Amp up magnification if you wish.

Notice on page 26 the hue of the seismic waves velocity returns in Antelope & Raptor.
Start with you eye at Antelope. See the aqua blue over the mustard yellow. Than transverse left to Raptor.

See the same?

Also. Look at White Tail. Do you get the impression of chimney outline from the very bottom?

Looks to be that these three are stacking up nicely.

;-)

[ArtM72]

Pet -

Your interpretations make a lot of sense. Lots of information here if you know what you are looking for. Nice to have a guide. Thanks.

It sure would be helpful to have a plan view of a map showing the location of the strike line of the Chart 23 seismic.

It is hard not to see the potential for connectivity of White Tail and Mule Deer. It is also easily imaginable there exist some, albeit potentially limited, connectivity between the western high points of Antelope and the eastern high points of Mule Deer. It doesn't take much of a crack for gas to transfer. Of course any connectivity suggests water concerns, but again it isn't difficult to imagine separate water tables at different elevations along the bottoms of the respective formations where the rock is much more dense and able to provide a more effective seal along the faultlines.

If Raptor is connected to White Tail and Mule Deer should the name should be changed to "Indominus rex"?

This all brings me back to the badly beaten dead horse known as Antelope connectivity. If the many seismic strike lines IOC has done criss crossing Antelope showed what we see on Chart 23 crossing Raptor, White Tail, Mule Deer and Antelope then yes connectivity within Antelope would be questionable. They don't. If there is a connectivity question about Antelope given Chart 23 that question would be whether E/A is connected to Mule Deer.

That question is fun to ponder.

[petrengr1]

I take it that none of us here are geophysicists so let’s see if we can learn anything from what IOC has presented at http://tinyurl.com/palye9e . First let’s look at the picture of the faults on the right side of Chart 13. You see three hypothetical faults at different angles. Now we need to decide which of these faults most closely represent the actual fault angle. In the middle picture they show the new gravity survey which they say supports the updated fault possibilities. The blue line in the middle and right picture represents the fault position for the old mid-case (P-50) that was probably used by both GLJ and GCA. The black line is what they now consider to be the new mid-case and it is as much as 2.5 km further west than the old mid-case. This would put the edge of the field almost to the western edge of PRL15. This line is also the same as the western most fault shown in the left picture of Chart 13. The red line is the high-case and you can see on the right hand picture that this case would extend the gas bearing rock all the way to below the gas/water contact to the West. (This is also illustrated in the left picture of Chart 14.) The red line is as much as 6 km west of the old mid-case line and would be well outside of the western boundary of PRL15. That is probably the reason it is not shown in the left picture of Chart 13.

That is the gravity data. What about the seismic data? Let’s look at Chart 23. Hession said this picture on the right side of Chart 23 shows that the field extends further to the west and that we can begin to pick the placement of the faults. As amateur geophysicists let’s assume the red, blue and yellow lines represent the gas bearing limestone. You can see that Antelope has been separated from Mule Deer and Mule Deer has been separated from White Tail by these faults. Antelope has been pushed up over Mule Deer and Mule Deer has been pushed up over White Tail. So go ahead and draw in your faults at the angle you think the picture indicates. Is it the steep angle (blue) shown in Chart 13, the mid-case (black) or the shallow angle (red) of the high case? Now, let’s look at Chart 26. Oh good, the professionals have drawn in the faults for us. Looking at the fault between Antelope and Mule Deer what does that look like to you? The steep fault of the low case or the shallow angle of the high case?

On Page 9 of the recent report from Morgan Stanley Hession says that both the newly reprocessed seismic and the new gravity data “definitely give us more volume”.

Thanks, Pet!  If the gravity gradiometry is as good an indication of reefal buildup on the west side of Antelope as it appears to indicate the reefal buildup in the areas where wells have been drilled so far, would you agree it looks like there may be room for another 4 to 5 wells on the west half of Antelope?

Thy- If we look at http://tinyurl.com/palye9e chart 13 the western fault in the left hand panel is their new mid-case. Keeping in mind we are only interested in the white area shown between the two faults that is above the gas/water contact, there is plenty of room to drill another well west of each of the wells that has already been drilled. That would be Antelope-1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. So yes there is plenty of room for at least five more wells. That just takes in the 2.5 km west of the old GLJ mid-case. Notice at the top of the central panel they say the area between the black and red lines is a  “Potential Area of  Interest”.  If the true location of the fault is the high-case that is 6 km west of the old GLJ mid-case, I guess we might well have another five or.......
I guess I (we) should not be so optimistic just yet, the JV is just now trying to convince each other to drill Antelope-7, one additional well.

[calaban48]

"Indominus Rex." Scholarly and appropriate. Love it!~ Bravo, sir!~

[petrengr1]

Pet - Your interpretations make a lot of sense. Lots of information here if you know what you are looking for. Nice to have a guide. Thanks. It sure would be helpful to have a plan view of a map showing the location of the strike line of the Chart 23 seismic. It is hard not to see the potential for connectivity of White Tail and Mule Deer. It is also easily imaginable there exist some, albeit potentially limited, connectivity between the western high points of Antelope and the eastern high points of Mule Deer. It doesn't take much of a crack for gas to transfer. Of course any connectivity suggests water concerns, but again it isn't difficult to imagine separate water tables at different elevations along the bottoms of the respective formations where the rock is much more dense and able to provide a more effective seal along the faultlines. If Raptor is connected to White Tail and Mule Deer should the name should be changed to "Indominus rex"? This all brings me back to the badly beaten dead horse known as Antelope connectivity. If the many seismic strike lines IOC has done criss crossing Antelope showed what we see on Chart 23 crossing Raptor, White Tail, Mule Deer and Antelope then yes connectivity within Antelope would be questionable. They don't. If there is a connectivity question about Antelope given Chart 23 that question would be whether E/A is connected to Mule Deer. That question is fun to ponder.

Art- I am going to assume that you are just playing around here with your dreams of connectivity between these prospects of vastly different depths. You even mention “any connectivity suggests water concerns” which indicates that in your heart you know these things are not connected, you just wish they were connected.

Thy has rightly explained many times about water being heavier than gas (and oil). Maybe the best way to define connectivity between structures is to go to the Total/Interoil SPA and see what Total requires to prove any other structures are connected to Elk or Antelope.
Here is what is required for the other prospects to be considered to be connected:

1. “such an accumulation has petroleum bearing sediments which are in direct and continuous petroleum contact”
2. “such an accumulation belongs to the same petroleum pressure regime”
3. “the composition of the petroleum of such accumulation is consistent with the composition of the petroleum of the Elk Field or Antelope Field”
4. “The top of the reservoirs section and petroleum water contact is listed in Table 1.”
(This implies that the petroleum water contact will be the same.)

So to list the requirements for connectivity between structures again in simple terms:
1. They will have the same pressure.
2. They will have the same gas/water contact.
3. They will be in continuous petroleum contact.
4. They will have the same hydrocarbon composition.

Since gas and oil  are lighter than water and since all of these structures are at vastly different depths (all deeper than Antelope) the laws of physics will not allow these structures to be connected if they are filled with hydrocarbons.

An example of this non-connectivity might be seen in Triceratops-2. In the same well we had two different reservoirs with different pressure and different gas/water contacts. These two reservoirs are not connected even though they are in the same well.

[ArtM72]

Art- I am going to assume that you are just playing around here with your dreams of connectivity between these prospects of vastly different depths. You even mention “any connectivity suggests water concerns” which indicates that in your heart you know these things are not connected, you just wish they were connected.

Thy has rightly explained many times about water being heavier than gas (and oil). Maybe the best way to define connectivity between structures is to go to the Total/Interoil SPA and see what Total requires to prove any other structures are connected to Elk or Antelope.
Here is what is required for the other prospects to be considered to be connected:

1. “such an accumulation has petroleum bearing sediments which are in direct and continuous petroleum contact”
2. “such an accumulation belongs to the same petroleum pressure regime”
3. “the composition of the petroleum of such accumulation is consistent with the composition of the petroleum of the Elk Field or Antelope Field”
4. “The top of the reservoirs section and petroleum water contact is listed in Table 1.”
(This implies that the petroleum water contact will be the same.)

So to list the requirements for connectivity between structures again in simple terms:
1. They will have the same pressure.
2. They will have the same gas/water contact.
3. They will be in continuous petroleum contact.
4. They will have the same hydrocarbon composition.

Since gas and oil  are lighter than water and since all of these structures are at vastly different depths (all deeper than Antelope) the laws of physics will not allow these structures to be connected if they are filled with hydrocarbons.

An example of this non-connectivity might be seen in Triceratops-2. In the same well we had two different reservoirs with different pressure and different gas/water contacts. These two reservoirs are not connected even though they are in the same well.

Pet -

Yes, in a sense I am playing around...but I am serious about the possibility of reservoir connection.  I just don't know the probability.

If two water tanks are connected only by a vent pipe the water in those tanks need not be at the same elevation.  The water has no way to go from one tank to the next and stays put.  A smilar situation exists in a series of water reservoirs on a river system.  It's all about spill point elevation and piping. 

It goes to logic that if two hydrocarbon fields are only connected by fractures or porosity above the highest water elevation the situation is directly analagous.  Two tanks, one common vent. Water stays where it is absent a pathway to the lower reservoir.  Meanwhile, the gas comingles.   

You are obviously in a far better position to judge the probability of such an outcome.  I just look at that seismic cross section , the proximity and vertical height of the fields and how little fracture area is necessary to rapidly put gasses in two structures at equilibrium.  It is good news that Raptor wasn't water logged.  Hopefully neither Mule Deer nor White Tail have substantial water.   I can't help but hope Wahoo turns out to be a fish out of water just like our dinosaurs and ruminants.

Best regards, as always.